Guest:
Login
|
Register
|
Search
|
FAQ
Chinadaily BBS
»
News Talk
»
China Today
» Beijing demands US cancel planned missile sale to Taiwan
Last Thread
Next Thread
24
1/2
1
2
>
Subject: Beijing demands US cancel planned missile sale to Taiwan
hanlei
(Magic)
Primary Member
UID 10008
Digest Posts 0
Credits 474
Posts 450
Registered 2003-8-17
Status Offline
Beijing demands US cancel planned missile sale to Taiwan
(AP)
China demanded Friday the United States scrap a planned sale of hundreds of missiles to Taiwan, warning the deal would harm regional stability and bilateral ties.
"We solemnly demand the leader of the United States... immediately cancel this weapons sale (and) avoid harming the peace and stability of the Taiwan Straits and Sino-US relations," foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said.
"The Chinese side expresses its strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition to this. We have raised solemn representations with the US side."
The US Department of Defence this week notified Congress that it planned to sell Taiwan 421 million US dollars worth of missiles.
"The proposed sale will help improve the security of the recipient and assist in maintaining political stability, military balance, and economic progress in the region," the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency said. Acquisition of 218 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air missiles and 235 Maverick missiles would help Taiwan "modernise its armed forces and enhance its defence ability to counter air and ground threats," it said.
Qin said the sale violated US commitments to a "one China policy," which maintains that there is only one China with Beijing as its capital.
By selling weapons to Taiwan, Washington was also violating its promise to gradually reduce sales to the island territory, he said.
"By selling these missiles to Taiwan, the United States is violating ... its commitments," Qin said.
"This is rude interference into China's internal affairs.".
The proposed sale comes after US Vice President Dick Cheney last week expressed concerns over China's growing military might and as top US intelligence officials said Beijing was trying to achieve parity with the US in military affairs.
"China's continued fast-paced military build-up are... not consistent with China's stated goal of a 'peaceful rise,'" Cheney said while on a trip to Australia.
Retired admiral Michael McConnell, the new director of US national intelligence, told Congress on Tuesday that "it's a matter of their building their military, in my view, to reach some sort of state of parity with the United States.
"They are a threat today, they will become an increasing threat over time."
US officials estimate China's annual defence spending at between 80 and 115 billion dollars, the highest in the world after the United States.
Following the barrage of criticism, China insisted this week that it posed no military threat to the rest of the world.
"China adheres to the role of peaceful development. We are an important force for maintaining peace and stability," foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said when asked about Cheney's comments.
[
Last edited by chinadaily at 2007-3-5 09:45 AM
]
2007-3-3 04:44 PM
#1
chinadaily
(chinadaily)
SuperModerator
UID 9672
Digest Posts
3
Credits 2432
Posts 1661
Registered 1970-1-1
Status Offline
Is this american intelligence true ??
China ballistic missile submarine force growing --- US navy intelligence
China is conducting sea trials of the first of five new nuclear-powered submarines armed with longer-range ballistic missiles, according to a US naval intelligence report made public on March 2, 2007.
The sea trials are part of a broader push by China to check US naval power in the western Pacific with a more modern fleet of nuclear-powered ballistic missile and attack submarines, the Office of Naval Intelligence said.
The first of the new nuclear ballistic missile submarines, designated the Type 094 SSBN, could begin operating as early as 2008, it said.
The submarine "will provide China with a modern and robust sea-based nuclear deterrent force," the ONI reported.
It will be equipped with the JL-2 sea-launched ballistic missile with range of 8,000 kilometers (5,000 miles), a big gain over China's only other ballistic missile submarine.
The XIA SSBN, a 24-year-old nuclear powered vessel, is armed with the JL-1 missile, which has a range of only 1,777 kilometers (1,000 miles).
Even at that shorter range, the XIA can target US military facilities in the region from launch points inside traditional Chinese operating areas, the report said.
The ONI said China probably will build five of the new ballistic missile submarines "in order to provide more redundancy and capacity for a near-continuous at-sea SSBN presence."
"Construction and sea trials of the Type 094 program are ongoing," it said.
The unclassified ONI report, which was obtained by AFP and has a question-and-answer format, was first reported by Sea Power magazine, then picked up by the Washington Times.
It said China also is concluding sea trials of a new Type 093 nuclear powered attack submarine that is expected to be quieter and armed with more advanced weaponry than its predecessor, the HAN SSN class submarines.
It will have anti-ship cruise missiles and more modern torpedoes than the HAN, the report said.
"China has built these features into the Type 093 in an effort to improve the PLA(N)'s (Peoples Liberation Army Navy) to conduct anti-surface warfare at greater ranges from the Chinese coast than its diesel submarine force offers," it said.
The report said the China's navy currently has about 55 attacks submarines, most of them diesel electric.
It is a smaller but more technologically advanced force than the one China had in the 1980s.
Each of the attack submarines are armed with anti-ship cruise missiles and designed to be quiet enough to operate in the open ocean.
A key focus of China's maritime strategy is to keep outside powers beyond striking range in a Tawan scenario.
"Much of China's military modernization effort of the past five years, and particularly the modernization of the Chinese Navy, has been designed to improve China's anti-carrier capability," the ONI said.
"China envisions an attack on a carrier strike group as incorporating submarine-launched ASCM (anti-ship cruise missile) strikes and ASBM (anti-ship ballistic missile) strikes," it said.
It said China is equipping theater ballistic missiles with maneuvering reentry vehicles with radar and infrared seekers to attack a ship at sea.
China's maritime strategy is also aimed at protecting a growing sea trade crucial to its economy, the report said. "In order to protect oil and other trade routes, the PLA (N) is beginning to develop the foundations of a naval capability that can defend sea lines of communications," the report said.
*****
personally, I hate Pentagon selling all kinds of weapons to Taiwan. By selling the island weapons, the U.S. is seriously hurting the feelings of each Chinese, and effectively harassing China's territorial reunification effort. I dislike our government investing too much money on military hardware, but, considering the U.S. time & again violating its promise and continue selling weapons to Taiwan, China should & must be prepared to defend itself with the best possible arms.
[
Last edited by chinadaily at 2007-3-3 05:21 PM
]
2007-3-3 05:10 PM
#2
mencius
(亞聖孟子)
Senior Member
UID 47051
Digest Posts
1
Credits 3629
Posts 3419
Registered 2004-12-1
Location Great Britain
Status Offline
Really?
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
hanlei
at 3-3-2007 08:44
By selling weapons to Taiwan, Washington was also violating its promise to gradually reduce sales to the island territory, he said.
When exactly did the current US government say it would do that?
If China wants to reduce arms sales to Taiwan it should stop the build up of missiles pointed at the island. If it continues its fast military build-up it is trying to have its cake and eat it.
2007-3-3 07:02 PM
#3
sweepin
Primary Member
UID 127539
Digest Posts 0
Credits 72
Posts 72
Registered 2007-2-23
Location usa
Status Offline
if the mainland was to go to war over taiwan, taiwan would certernly lose and even with outside help the mainland will still have 90% or more chance achieving it's objective. at best taiwan will achieve the status quo. the goal of the usa is to keep taiwan as it's trump card when dealing with the prc. the prc and usa both know this. though i don't believe the usa is hoping for a war across the straight, but should it arise, the usa is hoping to use a fool like chen sui bien to set china back a decade or atleast cause china to come to a squeching halt with it's modernization drive. this kind of ideology won't work, on the contrary it will only speed up chinas modernization drive.
[
Last edited by sweepin at 2007-3-5 05:48 PM
]
2007-3-5 02:20 PM
#4
sweepin
Primary Member
UID 127539
Digest Posts 0
Credits 72
Posts 72
Registered 2007-2-23
Location usa
Status Offline
US foreign policy
had the usa been fair in it's dealings with the world, many of todays promblems would not exist. over 3/4 of the world does not trust the usa. the world is at the brink of another arms race. i sincerely pray that the usa will change course and start playing a more constuctive role in the international arena. so long as it defends it's unilateral invasion of iraq, it will give other countries reasons to develop more destructive weapons to counter that threat. if the usa refuses to change course and denounce it's unilateral ideology then i am 100% for china's millitary build up.
2007-3-5 02:56 PM
#5
anna_sxm
Primary Member
UID 100201
Digest Posts 0
Credits 130
Posts 128
Registered 2006-5-15
Status Offline
the usa is not a fool, they don't hope the war across the straight really happen, the usa should stop where it should stop, I think no one want to see the war break out, because it will hurt both of them, no one will be the winner
2007-3-5 04:13 PM
#6
frothow
Junior Member
UID 75094
Digest Posts 0
Credits 1504
Posts 1490
Registered 2005-8-4
Location USA
Status Offline
Disgraceful
America needs to concentrate on its real enemy Islamic terrorists and not sell weapons to Taiwan . Dick Chaney is clueless with regard to China , America needs to have good relations with China its important for trade . No amount of propaganda will ever lead me to believe
China is a threat to Americas security .China is a peaceful country without religious radicals in power . I say China should ask America why
it has by far the biggest military? this is hypocrisy at its best , China should have a strong military whats wrong with protecting the worlds largest population?saying China is a threat is just a ploy to scare the American tax payer for more money for the millitary . Maybe China should decrease its millitary expenditures temporarily and see if America follows with its millitary . This would be interesting just to prove a point.
I hope the Chinese people realise that many Americans think like me in regards to China , China is becoming prosperous and its regular people are starting to live quite comfortably . I get mad when i here morons like dick Chaney talking about this imaginary threat from China! there is not a single Chinese face behind any terrorist attacks against America . I think that America should try to pave the way for China to be allies with America and not saber rattling with it . Just makes sense to me .
2007-3-6 02:33 PM
#7
diaboloist
Primary Member
UID 127346
Digest Posts 0
Credits 109
Posts 106
Registered 2007-2-19
Status Offline
QUOTE:
the usa is not a fool, they don't hope the war across the straight really happen, the usa should stop where it should stop, I think no one want to see the war break out, because it will hurt both of them, no one will be the winner
Nothing like a clear unambiguous message of continuing commitment to forestall unnecessary and precipitous ventures.
[
Last edited by diaboloist at 2007-3-6 03:11 PM
]
2007-3-6 03:02 PM
#8
beep2005
Newcomer
UID 128975
Digest Posts 0
Credits 2
Posts 2
Registered 2007-3-9
Status Offline
China can't demand US about anything.I think....It's better for China to remove all missiles away from Taiwan...And Taiwan always a part of China..it can't move away from China..Why China worry so much?...The most thing China is worry about Taiwan is democracy system that Taiwanese poeple has paid for it by their blood,tears and death,so it can be like today..
[
Last edited by beep2005 at 2007-3-11 12:43 PM
]
2007-3-11 12:41 PM
#9
sweepin
Primary Member
UID 127539
Digest Posts 0
Credits 72
Posts 72
Registered 2007-2-23
Location usa
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
beep2005
at 2007-3-11 12:41
China can't demand US about anything.I think....It's better for China to remove all missiles away from Taiwan...And Taiwan always a part of China..it can't move away from China..Why China worry so ...
china can demand; the us can ignore. taiwan can't move but it can be used. communism has never felt threaten by democracy; it is democracy that feels threaten by communism. communist countries do not teach their people to hate democracy, only their foreign policies. but democratic countries do teach their people to hate communism.
2007-3-11 02:15 PM
#10
sweepin
Primary Member
UID 127539
Digest Posts 0
Credits 72
Posts 72
Registered 2007-2-23
Location usa
Status Offline
Reply #11 upyours's post
well it's obvious that you have your head "UPYOUR A$$." even a blind person can see taiwan is no match for the mainland when talking about war. don't forget that the kmt still sees themselves as chinese and still cling on to the goal of unification. just another friendly reminder, the dirt beneath your feet belongs to CHINA whether it be PRC or ROC (and in case you lack intelligence as your post indicate, it stands for PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND REPUBLIC OF CHINA REPECTIVELY.) so i suggest you find another pile of dirt and declare independence. and before you can achieve independence you will still have to fight a war with the ants so GOOD LUCK!!! you gonna need it with your intelligence.
BTW. i believe ants are deaf so all that yellin and screamin isn't going to help.
2007-3-12 05:25 PM
#12
888dawei
Newcomer
UID 129149
Digest Posts 0
Credits 48
Posts 48
Registered 2007-3-10
Status Offline
Read other papers
In US have two parties Democrat (left) and republican (right).
Republican say fight if China attack Taiwan. ALSO SAY no tariff on china - free trade
Democrat says talk don't fight on Taiwan. ALSO SAY 25% tariff on china imports to keep jobs in US
Nobady have perfect ideas. Keep tariff off, leave taiwan alone, no independence, no war. Jackie Chan say War , ugh, what is it good for....absolutely nothing...say it again.
2007-3-13 10:42 PM
#14
pjtran
(陳青龍 aka 真多花色)
Super Member
UID 119233
Digest Posts 0
Credits 6616
Posts 5074
Registered 2006-12-2
Location 唐人街
Status Offline
in your dreams...
only if china can double up whatever taiwan negotiating with the US...arms to the US is huge revenues & US arms in the pacific is to monitoring the chinese & the russian...need i say more, maybe less!
2007-3-14 12:24 AM
#15
afri_simba
(Simba)
Senior Member
UID 87988
Digest Posts 0
Credits 3243
Posts 2847
Registered 2005-12-25
Status Offline
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
mencius
at 2007-3-3 14:02
QUOTE:
Originally posted by
hanlei
at 3-3-2007 08:44
By selling weapons to Taiwan, Washington was also violating its promise to gradually reduce sales to the island territory, he said.
When exactly did the
current
US government say it would do that?
You are right, Mr. Mencius. The
current
US gov't- J. W. Bush's administration didn't say it.
However,
QUOTE:
The US gov't
said
in 1972 in the Shanghai Communique (
http://usinfo.state.gov/eap/Archive_Index/joint_communique_1972.html
):
The U.S. side declared: The United States acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States Government does not challenge that position. It reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves. With this prospect in mind,
it affirms the ultimate objective of the withdrawal of all U.S. forces and military installations from Taiwan
. In the meantime, it will
progressively reduce
its forces and military installations on Taiwan as the tension in the area diminishes. The two sides agreed that it is desirable to broaden the understanding between the two peoples. To this end, they discussed specific areas in such fields as science, technology, culture, sports and journal- ism, in which people-to-people contacts and exchanges would be mutually beneficial. Each side undertakes to facilitate the further development of such contacts and exchanges.
And,
QUOTE:
The US gov't
said
in 1979 in the second Joint Communique (
http://usinfo.state.gov/eap/Archive_Index/joint_communique_1979.html
):
The United States of America and the People's Republic of China
reaffirm the principles
agreed on by the two sides in the Shanghai Communique
And,
QUOTE:
The US go'vt
said
in 1982 in the third Joint Communique (
http://usinfo.state.gov/eap/Archive_Index/joint_communique_1982.html
):
...the United States Government states that it does not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan, that its arms sales to Taiwan will not exceed, either in qualitative or in quantitative terms, the level of those supplied in recent years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and China, and that
it intends gradually to reduce its sale of arms to Taiwan
, leading, over a period of time, to a final resolution. In so stating, the United States acknowledges China's consistent position regarding the thorough settlement of this issue.
The third and final communique (1982-08-17), reaffirms the desire of both sides to further strengthen economic, cultural, educational, scientific, and technological ties. Both sides also reaffirmed the statements made about the Taiwan issue in the previous communique. Although no definitive conclusions were reached on the issue of arms sale to Taiwan, the United States
did declare its intent to gradually decrease its sale of arms to Taiwan
.
Officially, U.S. policy is governed by the Taiwan Relations Act, by the Six Assurances, and by the Three Communiques;
it has stated a commitment to a one China policy
. The strength of that commitment and the relationship between these policies, which are contradictory, changes from administration to administration.
Hope those will be of help for you, Mencius.
2007-3-14 03:22 AM
#16
irishinuk
Junior Member
UID 128959
Digest Posts 0
Credits 622
Posts 535
Registered 2007-3-9
Location United Kingdom
Status Offline
Personally, I think that 中華民國陸軍 has one major advantage over the PLA: It's far better trained, despite its' smaller size! 200,000 crack troops beat 2,000,000 amateurs any day! (Not to mention the US assistance the RoC government would receive!) 中華民國空軍 also has some extremely high-tech aircraft that beat the sh** out of whatever the PLA have... even if the PLA do have some decent fighter aircraft, somehow I imagine that typical Communist incompetence means that they haven't been properly trained!
The PLA has all the usual efficiency one expects from a bloated, corrupt, and inefficient state enterprise!
The question we really need to be asking is how long it would take for the Communist government to collapse after they make total fools of themselves when they fail to take over Taiwan?
I hope the Commies actually do try. They'll really lose face when they make a typical Commie f***-up of the whole operation!
Image Attachment:
Mirage2000.JPG
(2007-3-14 06:56 AM, 55.31 K)
2007-3-14 06:56 AM
#19
afri_simba
(Simba)
Senior Member
UID 87988
Digest Posts 0
Credits 3243
Posts 2847
Registered 2005-12-25
Status Offline
Reply #17 upyours's post
you remind me of a forum member, who always writes " I clean my sh*thole with Chinese faces..."
2007-3-14 07:06 AM
#20
24
1/2
1
2
>
Printable Version
|
Email to Friend
|
Subscription
|
Favorites
Forum Rules
Feedback
Privacy
Copyright By chinadaily.com.cn. All rights reserved
